Education of the Modern Doctor: Marcus Welby vs. House 
Obama’s the problem
I read your article about Darrell Issa in the July 7 edition [“The Front Lines”]. I’m going to be honest with you: I voted for Obama, but I’ve been extremely disappointed with his performance. I know the criticism was about Issa, but Obama has done a very poor job thus far. There are so many areas he seemed to fail in, like creating more jobs, healthcare reform, border control and, especially, the oil-leak disaster.
Did you know it took Obama 53 days before he even spoke to the CEO of BP? He criticized the previous administration’s handling of the Katrina disaster because of the slow reaction, but that was foreseeable by a few days. The oil disaster had been going on for 53 days and you don’t even talk to the CEO of the company who destroyed the region and adversely effected so many lives? That makes no sense to me.
Along with several of my colleagues, I don’t plan to vote for Obama for another term. I personally think trying to criticize Issa for blaming Obama for so many mishandlings does not resolve the problems we have in this country. We really needed strong leader with good decision-making skills. In hindsight, it seems the lack of experience is to blame.
David Samo, Steele Canyon
Faulconer responds
Providing services and shelter to homeless individuals and families who want help continues to be a priority of mine as the City Council member who represents the urban core of our city.
In last week’s editorial, CityBeat disagreed with my strong belief that the needs of neighboring businesses and residents should be considered when siting a Downtown homeless shelter. I support a homeless intake center Downtown. And it is critical that this intake center serve as a successful model that can be replicated in other parts of the city.
Homelessness is unfortunately a regional problem that requires both compassionate service options as well as enforcement tools.
All of us want to provide more permanent supportive housing options and services, and we’re working toward that. But we can’t effectively do so if you ignore the illegallodging injunction. It needs to be lifted—a ruling a judge would make based on housing options and services—in the surrounding area. In any community, not just Downtown, it would be important to lift the injunction because if beds and wraparound services are available, there’s an expectation among neighboring businesses and homeowners that those beds and services will be used. Homeless individuals who choose not to use the available beds and services will either move elsewhere or find themselves in front of a judge who would likely order him or her to take advantage of a range of social services.
The editorial says: “Even if the attorneys for the homeless plaintiffs were amenable to lifting the ban—and they’re not—and Judge McCurine were to be convinced of facts that don’t exist….”
What attorneys on both sides of the issue actually said on the record at the July 14 Land Use & Housing Committee meeting, which CityBeat attended—is that they are amenable to lifting the ban and are working toward that resolution. Scott Dreher, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, said projects like this give “all of us the ammunition we need to put something together that satisfies all the concerns.” Another attorney for the plaintiffs, Timothy Cohelan, added: “Our goal is to remain constructively involved.” City Attorney Jan Goldsmith said: “We’re moving along on our discussions on something that is challenging and unique.”
This plan is rooted in vision, compromise and hard work for a number of reasons. It’s important that the first facility is carefully thought out and executed. It should serve as a model of what can be done, and Downtown will be a better place for everyone. In the end, that’s the goal that matters most.
Kevin L. Faulconer, City Council President Pro Tem
This issue of CityBeat is brought to you by people whose blog has been hit by 2,689 people Googling the word “pee.”
